To:
"'Bill Manning'" <bmanning@isi.edu>
Cc:
ietf-provreg@cafax.se
From:
"Hollenbeck, Scott" <shollenbeck@verisign.com>
Date:
Fri, 16 Feb 2001 10:32:06 -0500
Sender:
owner-ietf-provreg@cafax.se
Subject:
RE: grrp-reqs-06, 11. Security Considerations [3]
Bill,
Have a read of the definitions section ("Thick Registry" specifically),
where it describes "technical information" as "information needed to produce
zone files".
<Scott/>
-----Original Message-----
From: Bill Manning [mailto:bmanning@ISI.EDU]
Sent: Friday, February 16, 2001 10:27 AM
To: shollenbeck@verisign.com
Cc: ietf-provreg@cafax.se
Subject: Re: grrp-reqs-06, 11. Security Considerations [3]
%
% Eric,
%
% The intention of requirement 11-[3] isn't to document that "a mechanism
% exists to to distinguish technical from social information", it's intended
% to note that disclosure of non-technical information may be subject to
% restrictions and the protocol needs to provide a way to identify
information
% that is subject to disclosure restrictions. This was added at the request
% of Karl Auerbach.
What is the distinction between "technical" and "non-technical"?
Are these definitions immutatble within/between juristictions?
Will they withstand legal review?
In which venues?
--bill